Dun dun duuuuuuuuun
/ominousmusic "theres a storm coming, miller."
I couldn't get back on again on Sunday after getting a phone call and then getting tied up with other stuff - I get the feeling I may have missed something possibly important here?
Nothing to see here, This is not the operation the Vanu are looking for.
Just wondering, might it be an idea to organise the squad around next time. We had 12 people, 6 heavy, 4 medic and 2 engineers. I wish to suggest the following (based on 12 man).
Alpha (part 1)
Alpha (part 2)
Bravo (part 1)
Bravo (part 2)
For the most part we act like we acted last time, but when we start cleaning a base up from the last resistance we stick in groups of 3. That way if we face a small pocket of resistance we can fight it more easilly. Also directing a squad becomes simplefied. The "leader" of a sub group does not have to give orders, he just moves around and his two budies stick with him. The platoon commander also has more freedom to send people around. And as I said, in big fights we just fight as one large group, but for the smaller tasks we can go around in a more organised way.
This really depends on location, Dominicus. Attacking a tower and holding, I believe, 2xMax, 2x Engie, 2xMedic, 4x Heavy, 1-2XLight or Infiltrator.
Also HA and LA could swap a bit, 3 HA min though, least 2 people with shotguns.
I made the suggestion based on last sunday :P. But you are right, it depends on the location. Yet for a basic squad I think this works best. It can do well in any base, just certain compositions work better in specific locations. This is an allround set-up for almost any situation.
No one reads my posts, do they :(
I read your posts, Boffin!
(Well, sometimes, but I read the one you were talking about.)
Did you ever manage to try out some of the squad work?
I would certainly be up for what you and Dominicus are talking about.
Also, Ayam, you are a freaky stalker!
But in a good way.
several of us have had this idea (separately, apparently) so I definitely think we should try it out. I'm off on holiday for a week though :(
Could use proximity chat for that.
Yeah, I agree with Onlylearning.
I think the key to close teamwork being effective is constant communication with your squad mates.
We've found before when we've split a couple of squads across locations that comms becomes really confusing...
"Enemy Sunderer South"
"Is that at location X or Y?"
I imagine it would only get worse with multiple fire teams.
As Bastiat suggests, we could try in-game comms (although squad might be better than proximity if fire teams are split into different squads). It's a bit more painful to get working properly compared to Mumble but would allow us to keep Mumble clear for Platoon/Leadership chat.
I know the Vanu outfit have a complicated Mumble setup for strategic nights but I'm guessing RTRS folk will find that a bit much, at least at the moment?
I know it's a pain but you could set up whispers among the fire team? If they're relatively small it wouldn't take too much time or effort and would ensure that if you have more than 4 fire teams (as Boffinboots originally brings up as an issue) you wouldn't cause complete comms confusion...
It's worth noting that lots of people still have intermittent issues with squad chat in game causing it to not work.
Here's one more thing. 3 people isn't really a well rounded squad and we won't be doing any good with small groups, threesome isn't that effective, nobody is fully satisfied in fully participating. Though, we could run specialized groups, but 3 is only effective when taking a really small base. It's better have two 5-6 man squads, than three-four 4-3 man squads. Even in CQC situations, there are more than 2 entrances, you need to cover usually, which is best done by 2 per possible enemy approach.
On that basis surely you'd be better off with one person "leading" the units then? Just to ensure cohesion?